With the introduction of Healthcare Refusal Laws, however, personal beliefs are more likely to interfere with access to medical care, tipping the balance away from what is best for the patient and toward what makes the healthcare provider most comfortable.
The conversation about the rights of healthcare providers to refuse service based on their own personal or religious beliefs has intensified over the past decade. As of July 2026, 11 states have enacted “Healthcare Refusal Laws,” presenting changes for the LGBTQ+ community as well as those who offer community care to help prevent the spread of HIV and other STIs.
So, how do Healthcare Refusal Laws impact caregivers and the communities they serve? And how can organizations operating under these laws develop deliberate strategies to maintain access to care?
How Healthcare Refusal Laws impact care access and outcomes
Healthcare Refusal Laws can greatly impact access to care and outcomes. There are several touchpoints that we have with patients and the community that can be directly affected.
One crucial hurdle is the barrier to accessing PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis) and PEP (post-exposure prophylaxis), as some refusal laws allow providers or pharmacies to decline prescribing or dispensing PrEP or PEP. This permissiveness creates geographic and logistical gaps, especially in rural areas or regions with limited providers, delaying or preventing access to medications proven to reduce HIV transmission risk by over 99% when taken consistently.
Refusals can also extend to antiretroviral medications or routine HIV care. Patients may face delays in starting or continuing therapy, which can increase viral load, raise transmission risk, and worsen health outcomes. Pharmacies declining to stock or fill HIV medications could further compound this issue.
Additionally, Health Refusal Laws can have a disproportionate effect on high-risk populations. Laws often intersect with existing stigma, which can disproportionately affect LGBTQ+ individuals, people who inject drugs, and racial/ethnic minorities who already experience higher HIV rates. Refusals can reinforce discrimination and reduce willingness to seek care, feeding into the stigma that can often lead vulnerable people to avoid testing, care, or peer support.
These policies can reduce overall clinic capacity, increase wait times, and discourage new providers from offering HIV services in restrictive environments.
Beyond the ethical and legal
Healthcare Refusal Laws are not just an ethical or legal concern for the LGBTQ+ community. The decline in routine testing and prompt treatment, as well as the lack of access to preventative measures such as PrEP, impedes progress in the fight against HIV and AIDS.
Delayed or refused treatment can also have far-reaching economic impacts. When treatment for HIV is delayed, it can lead to more complex health issues requiring costly hospitalizations and interventions, which contribute to higher healthcare costs for everyone.
Refusal laws turn routine HIV prevention and treatment into a high-touch, resource-heavy process that reduces overall clinic capacity, lengthens wait times for new patients, and compels organizations to absorb higher operational costs for the same volume of care. Data from states with broad refusal protections show measurable drops in PrEP uptake and higher rates of care interruptions compared to states with narrower exemptions.
For organizations that focus on 340B-supported HIV/STD care, these policies require intentional strategy adjustments, such as stronger transportation programs, expanded pharmacy networks, and policy advocacy, to maintain access for the most vulnerable patients.
Healthcare providers have an obligation to serve diverse populations without judgment or prejudice. With the introduction of Healthcare Refusal Laws, however, personal beliefs are more likely to interfere with access to medical care, tipping the balance away from what is best for the patient and toward what makes the healthcare provider most comfortable. It is a slippery slope that could have potentially disastrous consequences.
The goal of nonprofit organizations and people who work in this area of advocacy is to continue reducing rates of HIV diagnoses and transmissions and improving overall health outcomes. Without access, trust, and equity in healthcare, they will likely fall short of their goals.
Join the conversation!